New Silver July 2021 Update

Dear Community,

July was a very busy month on all fronts. We are busy building new tech, improving the process and working through challenges that permeate the general real estate market. Please see our July update below:

Loan Originations

New Loans: 17
New Loan USD Volume: $7.84mm
Average Interest Rate: 9%
Average Loan Amount: $461,386
Average Loan to Value: 65%
Average FICO score: 697
Current MakerDAO Debt Ceiling: $20mm with about $5.8mm used

Loan Performance

90+ day late: 0
Forbearance: 0
Foreclosure: 0


We have released a major update that includes the Servicing module, this enables tracking our loans from originations to maturity, and provides borrowers enhanced online features for tracking their loans and construction. We are currently working on integrating with Tinlake, this will enable much faster and error-free NFT minting. We will also be looking into improving loan status reporting so that the community can see updates in real-time.


We made new hires in July, Katrina will start this month as a Senior Paralegal and Carmel as our Content and PR Manager.


Any idea why the numbers on the Tinlake dashboard for this pool are so different? Both the average loan and interest are very different there. Is this a UI bug or an artifact of the reporting delay or something?

Hey @PaperImperium, this reporting has the total originated volume, a few loans didn’t fit the covenants due to size so they were sold off to another partner. Going forward, we will make the distinction on the reporting to be more clearer on what went into Tinlake and what didn’t.

1 Like

Any chance we can get the numbers that went into the Tinlake pool instead of total originations?

Maybe @SebVentures or someone from RWF has it readily available to share?

Just trying to reconcile what’s in the pool with what’s reported.

Thank you,

You can find all the originated loans in the Tinlake Pool here with the date.

There is also a cool Dune Analytics dashboard here (but maybe less useful to get numbers).

Yes. They do not match the numbers given here.

I was wondering why the discrepancy. Do you have a breakdown, @SebVentures? You monitor NS monthly

I don’t know what is your point of comparison, so it’s difficult to explain.

If the difference is small, it can be $/DAI conversion issue

Total loans, average loan size, and interest rates are very different. Which is why I was asking for a breakdown of what was placed in Tinlake.

The Tinlake pool shows 9 loans. The average size is $238k. The interest rates range from 5.8% to 7.2%.

Since the statistics reported here are not for the Tinlake pool, I was asking what those stats might be.

You are monitoring this account on a monthly basis, correct? Perhaps you have the numbers for what was deposited into Tinlake (rather than total originations across New Silver)?

As Kirill said, those numbers are for New Silver Lending and not only the Tinlake Pool.

This explain why the average on New Silver Lending is higher than those for the pools, as those were too big to be allowed in the pool under the convenants we defined.

For the difference in interest rate, it’s origination fees. Again New Silver Lending vs the pool.

All granular data for Tinlake is on-chain. I agree it would be nice to have a dashboard.

So you don’t have any of this information beyond what is on the Tinlake pool? How do you verify Tinlake is displaying correct information?

Here are the numbers for Tinlake for July. As I mentioned, we will break out the numbers going forward. There were 3 loans that did not fit the pool according to the covenants, and 1 loan that was paid off (it’s counted in this summary).

New Loans: 14
New Loan USD Volume: $2.5mm
Average Interest Rate: 8.9%
Average Loan Amount: $179,040
Average Loan to Value: 63%
Average FICO score: 694

Why are the numbers displayed on Tinlake so different? Is there a discrepancy or is there some formula that gets the numbers there to match those here?

If there is a discrepancy, is it in the Tinlake dashboard or somewhere else?

Dates are different. If you take loan #45 it’s in July in Tinlake (Tinlake operation) but the date of the loan itself is end of June. And some loan issued in second part of July could be financed on Tinlake only in August after the DC increase.

@Philinje, @williamr, and myself have access to the underlying loan tape and we run random inspections each month to check the numbers with the underlying documents. A good part of that info should be brought on-chain at some point.

1 Like

Yes, the Origination dates is how we report, however, loans might be added to Tinlake some days later. We are close to completing an integration with Tinlake which should make this process a bit faster.

1 Like

There is always a delta in terms of dates between the actual loan origination date and the financing date as shown in the tinlake UI. The same happens with regards to maturity date, the SPV maturity date is usually a few days earlier than the Centrifuge one. The differences are in days to cater for weekends, holidays and such events where real-world businesses (banks, custodians etc) operate on a Mon-Fri 9 to 5. Having that delta, particularly on the maturity date, is to prevent tinlake from flagging an arrears event where it can be simply be due to a bank-wire delay or a weekend/public holiday on the part of the issuer and their counterparties.

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.